Truth and Absolute Truth in Neutrosophic Logic

Feng Liu
Dept. of Economic Information, School of Information (Xinxi Xueyuan),
Xi'an University of Finance and Economics (Xi'an Caijing Xueyuan)
44 Cuihua Nan Road (Cuihua Nanlu 44 Hao), Xi'an, Shaanxi Province, 710061, P. R. China
liufeng49@sina.com

Abstract: As a philosophical analysis of some fatal paradoxes, the paper distinguishes the conceptual difference between
representation of truth and source of truth, and leads to the conclusion that in order to acquire the genuine source of truth,
independently of specific representations possibly belonging to different worlds, one is necessary to ignore all the ideas, logics,
conceptions, philosophies and representable knowledge even himself belonging to those misleading worlds, returning to his infant
nature, as a preliminary step for his cultivation of unconstrained wisdom. It also carries out some coordinative crucial issues as
natural-doctrine, minded-unwitting, logic-infancy, conception-deconception, determinacy-indeterminacy. The paper tries to verify the
role of neutrosophy and neutrosophic logic in religious issues and open a gateway toward the oriental classics, excavating the lost
treasure.

Keywords: Neutrosophy, Dao, de-conception, logic, infancy, sensation.

1. Introduction

Although men is constantly achieving in science, but based on a physics scientist's dream, we might have moved no further (In his
dream he saw the speedy moving bicycle (he lived in that period) advanced no further. But when he stepped into this world in his
dream, he felt he was moving fast by bicycle).
Human being is normally educated in a confusing way – we have created such a ―science‖ even without any knowledge of
existence and non-existence: ―Everyone can not see himself a second ago, everyone can not see himself for the time being and
everyone can not see himself a second future. Everyone could not know what the existence of self is. Everyone is also difficult to say
the non-existence of self‖, and therefore taken those images as true or real, and furthermore created such truths belonging to this
bewildering world.
Different educations yield different understanding toward truth. I don‘t stand for the magnificence of a theory, since such truth and
false inter-yield each other, and hardly can one reach the proper perception: neither left nor right, so a great philosopher also commits
mistakes in spite of his profound piece. The key lies in the subjectivity toward a truth, thus comes the saying that truth varies, or truth
be adapted to modern ages.
Let‘s examine some sophisticated issues to see whether correct:
 We don‘t intend to create something as judgment, for any judgment is prone to yield selfishness: like, dislike, etc. Truth is
written to conduct our behavior, therefore it does not lie in any sophisticated model, but in our conduct, as we often contradict our
own aphorisms in behavior. Thus the issue turns to the understanding of our nature, which is not expressed or represented in any fixed
form, or truth cannot be absolutely fixed in form too.
The point is:
1. Although the absolutely natural mental state is free of logic and only with the most (absolutely) right genuine instinct, but it is
shown as normal, as if he had his private opinion in appearance, even though he has nothing of his own in essence (But my current
knowledge is too far from the point).
2. If one really gets rid of all ideas and minds, he is then no more than a stone – Truth is alive not dead.
3. One needs to abandon all his previous ideas only to adapt to the greatest education, not to abandon his brain.
4. In order to acquire the genuine source of truth, independently of specific representations possibly belonging to different worlds,
one is necessary to compromise, neglect even to get rid of all the ideas, logics, conceptions, philosophies and knowledge but only
belonging to those misleading worlds, returning to his infant nature, as a preliminary step for his cultivation of unconstrained wisdom.

 To my previous assertion that ―name is merely our mental creation. It is rather a belief than an objective being, and varies among
different people. ‖[5], an explanation can be: In practice we have to assume that for incomplete knowledge system as in ordinary
human, one can regard truth existing in relativity to individual‘s practical situation. Truth exists in variant form corresponding to the
variant form of individual error. The absolute truth, even there exists, is not perfectly shown in any particular form (it has no form),
and therefore inexpressible with symbols. So in this sense it is absolutely absurd to sedulously look for absolute truth in theoretical

1
manner; and only in this sense the most complete logic system is by no means complete, or, complete is incomplete.
The point is: If there were no particular forms to carry out an education that can correct our mistakes and misunderstandings, there
would have been no education one can accept. In this way what one looks for is a proper form of education rather than the voidness.

 (The above paper) ―In fact, this belief of ‗it is‘ is always critical (Buddhism). In Buddhist saying, all such beliefs are created by
ourselves.‖
The point is:
1. To our ordinary minds we normally employ our illuding consciousness, but to those who understand the essence, it is not at all
critical.
2. Buddhism doesn‘t tell us to negate everything, nor is it nihilism. It tells us to completely abandon our subjectivity and really
understand everything. Although there are great prejudices in every ordinary man, this is not to say there doesn‘t exist absolute
rightness. Nor is the world a nihility where there is nothing but our imaginations. The world appears differently to the different mental
realms of individuals.
3. Although I am a Buddhist, but only a beginner, like a primary school student, and naturally full of mistakes and
misunderstandings. But important: a tiny difference can lead us to the hell (―one word‘s difference from the sutra is equal to the
devil‘s saying‖). So I have no qualification to speak any truth illustrated in Buddhism.

 ―There is no absolute fact.‖[6]

The point is: absolute truth doesn‘t non-exist, but perceived with wisdom eyes.

 (The same paper)“There is fact, but merely beliefs created by ourselves.”

The point is: we cannot deny the existence of the genuine and ultimate reality – we cannot assert that there is nothing objective in
the world but our subjectivity.

 (The same paper)―When we see wind blowing a pennant we will naturally believe we are right (that it is the wind or the pennant
that moves) in our consciousness, however it is subjective (actually it is our minds that move). In other words, what we call the
objective world can never absolutely be objective at all.‖
The point is that it is anti-Buddhism. Buddhism exhibits absolutely that all living creatures can definitely reach the absolute
objectiveness through the proper education.

 (The same paper) ―Whenever we believe we are objective, this belief however is subjective too.‖
This is absolutely wrong for a wise mind.

 (The same paper) “In fact, all these things are merely our mental creations (called illusions in Buddhism) that in turn cheat our
consciousness: There is neither pennant nor wind, but our mental creations.”
The point is that I am unqualified to explain. It may be our imperfect consciousness (vikalpa, as I imagine as separative (splitting)
mind) that takes them as wind move and the pennant move, but we cannot say that wind and pennant are merely mental creations
instead of objective being.

 (The same paper) “The world is made up of our subjective beliefs that in turn cheat our consciousness. This is in fact a
cumulative cause-effect phenomenon.”
The point is: We can say that we are constantly cheating our selves with our constant subjective illusions we are creating in every
fraction of second, but we cannot say that the world is made up of subjectivity – a kind of nihilism rather than Buddhism.

 (In a lot of papers, but mostly in [7]) ―Everyone can extricate himself out of this maze of illusion (in some sources it is
miswritten as ―…is illusion‖), said Sakyamuni and all the Buddhas, Bodhisattvas around the universe, their number is as many as that
of the sands in the Ganges.‖
The maze means our subjectivity. We learn Buddhism just to conquer subjectivity and really objectively understand the world. It is
shown in Buddhism Sutras that everyone can achieve it, but the maze not mentioned, so it is implied.

 (The same paper) ―Fact: a Belief rather than Truth.‖

The same nihility error as above. Knowledge exists in the contradiction between known and unknown for us – those known is a
tiny drop and those unknown is an ocean. In this sense, facts or truth relative to our ordinary conception can hardly reveal the reality,
but it doesn‘t mean there is no reality.

 (The same paper) “There is no truth and false actually: there is because the outcome has to meet someone‘s desire - they are
2
merely the attributes of a tradeoff. One false deed can be true in another perspective, e.g., eating much is good, because of the
excellent taste and nourishment, but it is also bad when he gets weighted. Neutrosophy shows that a true proposition to one referential
system can be false to another.‖
The point is: although the same truth can be illustrated in contradictory languages relative to the specifics of individual minds, we
cannot say there is no self-enlightenment – This is arrant subjectivism and arrant anti-Buddhism. For example, ignorance of
cause-effect doesn‘t mean the non-existence of cause-effect. Cause-effect universally appears in every action even every mental move
(idea). Ignorance of natural Dao (natural way, natural law) doesn‘t mean the non-existence of such Dao.

 (The same paper) ―Whenever we hold the belief ‗it is …‘, we are loosing our creativity. Whenever we hold that ‗it is not …‘, we
are also loosing our creativity. Our genuine intelligence requires that we completely free our mind —neither stick to any extremity nor
to ‗no sticking to any assumption or belief‘.‖….―As we mentioned previously, whenever there is truth, there is also false that is born
from/by truth—this abstraction (distinction) is fatal to our creativity‖…―Because everything believed existing, true or false, is nothing
more than our mental creation, there is no need to pursuit these illusions, as illustrated in the Heart Sutra…‖
The point is:
1. Creativity is an easy metaphor for our inner ―wisdom‖, ―nature of instinct‖, but far from explicit, since the inner wisdom
germinates from a tiny seed, naturally grows up in wind and storm – not at all something created.
2. There is only a tiny step between the genuine truth and fabrication. Truth pertains to a natural way, but when anything private
added in, it deteriorates.
3. Mental creation comes from our private mind, but we cannot deny our wise beliefs – the right belief is the light in the darkness,
not at all our mental creation, although normally mixed with our mental creations.
4. It is absurd for a kid to comprehend the mind of a PhD. It is far more to explain the Heart Sutra with our knowledge. More we
explain, more absurd we are. Therefore it has been far too absurd for me to explain Buddhism. I am far, far, far away from qualified.

In general, it is not that we should abandon mind, but should abandon our private mind to adapt to the universal mind. As to the
universal mind, let‘s see:

2. Morality and Doctrine

Is oriental culture a kind of science? There lies a crucial difference in that western science seeks the exterior solutions outside out
heart. However, our ancient sages illustrated that human is an integral part of the universe, and all the phenomena never skip out of
out heart. And very fortunately, many wise men did succeed in cultivating their heart to testify the profound truth. So our eastern
classics focus on our inner cultivation.
However people including the overwhelming majority of Chinese would regard such education extra (to life or science). Then I
tried to refer to http://www.amtb.org.sg/2/2_10/2_10_1/2_10_1.htm, a link in the Dallas Buddhist Association
(http://www.amtb-dba.org/English/index.html), to find an explanation, but unfortunately in Chinese. Here I try my reluctant
interpretation (I am not at all qualified to translate Buddhism and hardly possible to explain. Please contact the corresponding Taiwan
or Singapore website, where there are plenty of English versions of texts and videos of Buddhism, to request the standard translation).

What is Dao (Tao)? It is the natural principle all over the universe, the natural order, the essentiality of nature. The great universe
has its order and rule, where the education of ancient sages roots. Education stems from here, and human being has to obey the natural
principle – it is Dao. In our Chinese notion of the integral of human and nature, heaven, earth and human are an integral whole.
Human should understand the heart of heaven. What is the heart of heaven? The natural law, natural rule. For human, it is the human
relationship, of husband-wife, brothers and sisters, monarch-subjects, friends, etc. It is the natural rule, not regulations or systems,
nor schools or doctrines. Man conforming to it is said to practice Daoism. There is practice, there is gain bodily and heartily, called
virtue or moral which is the partial standard of daily conduct. However, this partial standard should accord to the universal Dao and
natural law. This is where the education of ancient sages roots.
Chinese emphasized education from prenatal influence. A pregnant mother should be upright in heart, correct in appearance, for
every intention, pleasure, anger, sorrow or joy, influences the fetus. Chinese understood this principle, and therefore their babies were
very well gifted, developed in the ten month‘s pregnancy. Parents had the responsibility for their children…… As I often mentioned,
disaster falls nowadays, and still severe in the future, why? I have only one answer: ―suffer from disobeying the olds (the Buddha,
Laozi, Confucius, etc.).‖ It is the power of culture that makes China survive for thousands of years, and the marrow of culture lies in
education…… The rulers were supported by people, for they didn‘t administrate with their own imperial edicts, but with the sage‘s
education of Confucianism, Buddhism and Daoism. So the society maintained peace, enjoying the wise period of prosperity, all
attributed to the ancient education, so they benefited from the olds‘ teachings. Since the Republic of China, very unfortunately,
Chinese lost their national self-confidence, and have therefore fallen into such a tragic situation: so overwhelmingly worship and keep
the blind faith in the foreign countries, as to overthrow our own culture. Yes, but is there any better substitute to benefit people? If no,
3
troubles arise [3].

3. Minded and Unwitting:

The neutrality in neutrosophics seems similar to ―Madhyma-pratipada‖ and ―Mean‖ in Chinese culture, which might mean proper
(no mental move, no self consciousness added, as if no self exists, I believe): neither left nor right, but neutrosophy is conveying
different meanings at present. For example, if A stands for white and Anti-A black, then Neut-A should mean gray, however either
black or white can add to our subjectivity and should not be adhered to (as we are blind to the ultimate truth, it can be more wrong to
imagine the being and non-being), otherwise we are unconsciously moving into this dimensional world that inhibits our access to the
―infinite dimensional‖ world.
If the quantum world reveals the more general objectivity, it is very possibly that an expert in classical physics less apt at quantum
physics, due to his default education. Same to human conflict, with each insisting on his own sphere of truth due to his default
education or his private manner of perception, even incomplete or misleading. A possible conciliation lies in compromising –
diminishing his minded way, to reach the understanding of another sphere:
(The idea of) A diminishes toward no-sticking-to-A
(The idea of) B diminishes toward no-sticking-to-B
Since a fact reflected from the mirror of A implies the private background (referential point) of A and the creation (including the
negative, distorted) of A, both need to be compromised to see a mutual base.
Provided that A implies a more general way that covers B, should A ignore his idea? Sure, since the relatively more complete idea
is misinterpreted in the language, background or referential system of B. As I mentioned in earlier paper [5], the best language should
be no (no-sticking-to) language.
If everyone could ignore the idea of himself, there would be no misunderstanding in the world. Therefore, the best idea would be
No (self) Idea or none self-idea (I don‘t mean a stone, a nihility, but a natural way). However, man would be too clever to believe it.
So the conciliation to current crises lies in education: if we find our education contrary to the nature, not only should we
compromise, but also diminish and abandon it (e.g., the ―n-dimensional‖ manner) to adapt to an universal (―infinite dimensional‖)
manner – to loose is to gain, no loss, no gain: One needs to abandon his old to adapt to the new, abandon his private mind to reach the
universal one, abandon the illusion to acquire the true, abandon the capricious to acquire the eternal.
It is also dangerous if we persist in the leaves but blind to the trunk or root. For example, science is developed to change destiny,
but what on earth is destiny? Liaofan‘s Four Lessons [10] shows the principle and practice to change destiny. But no understanding is
beyond practice – we can never reach the correct understanding by any means of judgment or measurement based on our ―scientific‖
referential manner, as I mentioned that science would reflect the same world in which few is able to command fate.
I eventually find that it would be the fault of logic itself – whenever there is logic, there is incompleteness – logic is a relatively
dead representation of our live sensation:

4. Logic and Infancy

The question arises from the English learning for Chinese on which I find that the students spend a huge amount of time in
reciting vocabulary but acquire far less. See a talk with friends:
―Why can it be wrong?‖
―Because what they have learned is not English – they are merely symbols, an illusion.‖
―Why?‖
―Do they reflect the symbols in English or in Chinese logic? As a matter of fact they first reflect the symbols in Chinese, and then
carry out the logic inference in Chinese way! Are they learning English or Chinese?‖
―What‘s the point?‖
―The point is, what they have learned are merely such pointers that point to English – symbols are supposititious, one cannot infer
anything without experience, so I call their effort in vain.‖
―Then what is the true manner?‖
―The sensation of English. All your activities, reading, listening, oral and writing, all serve this motif. Chinese students failed just
in this – they pay too much attention to grammar rules and Chinese logic in interpretation, as if they are always interpreting the
English literals in Chinese logic, however, it is just such logic that inhibits the sensation.‖
―Do you mean my logic inhibits my language aptitude?‖
―As you know, the best language learner is infant baby – the success lies just in the ignorance of logic. Logic can be a kind of dead
sensation: when one infers in logic, does he exploit his sensation any more?‖
―Do you mean we should feel English instead of inferring?‖
―No, just the opposite: no sticking to feelings, ideas (that are in fact no more than distraction), even ignoring yourself (e.g., the
role of a student busy for exams), can you concentrate on the author‘s role, even unconscious of acquiring of English, like a baby
4
learning in playing. Learning is equivalent to playing a role that needs great concentration. Sensation is shapeless, like ‗creativity‘. We
can never shape them.‖
―But it is a too far away goal.‖
―Sure, you‘d employ all the means to understand the context, but soon when you have done, try to abandon such means to build
up your English sensation. When one is able to walk, does he still carry the crutches along with him?‖
―But how can I read English without referring to its Chinese meaning?‖
―Can you read without referring, as if they had no meaning? Whenever you mind what they mean, you are using your Chinese
logic again. Comprehension would lie in the ignorance of comprehension – or otherwise how can you forget yourself in the role of the
author?‖
―Then how do you find some famous language teachings of English like those of Li Yang and Zhong Daolong?‖
―Li Yang‘s Crazy English negates the sensation theory, but his manner happens to enhance the sensation by inhibiting logical
reasoning. He leads the students to perform all his hand gestures while reciting English just, in my personal opinion, to get rid of all
the mental distraction from their learning habit. Professor Zhong Daolong‘s reverse (as contrary to the impatience for success of
students) learning manner conducts student‘s coordination of all their possible senses: see English, listen to English, write in English,
speak English, etc., simultaneously, with special emphasis on dictation rather than on reading with merely eyes, just to serve the same
motif – to abandon their imagination, to get rid of mental distraction, for in this manner no one has time to apply logic any more.‖
―You mean to retrieve our own ability of an infant baby?‖
―A famous Taiwan educationist Professor Wang Caigui made a through investigation, and asserts that the crucial or deciding
learning period of a whole life span is from 0 to 3rd year, including antenatal education. Children are naturally gifted with the innate
aptitude in everything: whatever seed you plant, all absorbed in like foam rubber. However their innate aptitude diminishes with the
age grows, disturbed or distracted by worries or vexations, or even withers beyond the age of 13, so a great figure should accept
earlier education of the giants.‖
―Can one retrieve that after the age of 13?‖
―Sure, as long as he is resolved to conquer the distraction.‖
―How?‖
―First, don‘t apply logic (pertaining to our misleading education, since we have been educated in a wrong way), since logic itself
brings you distraction. Never mind what you acquire, toward unintentionality. Second, recite (or silently) the greatest pieces as long as
you have time, such as Confucius‘s, Laozi‘s, or very simply just ―Amitabha‖, to constantly replace distraction.‖
―Does Amitabha have any meaning?‖
―The innate aptitude of Children lies just in this: they never guess the meaning. Whenever you guess or infer the meaning, you are
seeking distraction unwittingly.‖
―Does it work?‖
―It is not my personal invention, but from our lost Chinese classics. A patient of diabetes was suffering from insomnia, and failed
in all her effort of counting numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ,9, 10… After my wife changed her mind to recite Amitabha, she
immediately had a perfect sleep. The point is, never add more distraction or any doubt. The power lies just in you confidence and
concentration.‖
―Why did she fail by counting numbers?‖
―I am afraid the numbers help nothing (there are such cases when one builds up his internal power of concentration with numbers,
but I prefer the external power. With this help, in fact, one can eventually cultivate his correct internal power), but Amitabha (there are
infinite means in Buddhism, not necessary this one) signifies the greatest power of the universe which she resonates with.‖
―Then, you believe our mind acts as a receiver tuner?‖
―Exactly. A child can resonate with any signal he perceives, such as sentimental wound or evils, entirely absorbed like foam
rubber, and performs it as soon as he grows up. On the contrary, the Classics Recital Program for Children initiated by Prof. Wang
signifies a great education manner. Classics bring you the source of human wisdom. To recite these classics is an important path to
develop potential, to learn language, to enhance cultivation, and to open the gates of wisdom for children. On account of our own
Chinese culture, I would prefer Daodejing of Laozi, Buddhist scriptures, The Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean, etc. Children
should not be asked to understand the meaning of the books, but should be led to recite all the books line by line, and paragraph by
paragraph.‖
―Do you believe logic is a minor, subordinate or trifle aspect of intelligence?‖
―A head of School of Information Engineering and Automation of the Xi‘an University of Technology alluded to the emphasis on
logical thinking in engineering. I answered, if the logics come from the celebrity, how can one escape or surpass the constraints of the
celebrity?
Logic is relative to the world one belongs to, e.g., the ant‘s world, the bird‘s world, each has its own characteristic of logic. Is our
world the perfect one?‖
―No.‖
―Are we willing to be confined to the logic of the imperfect world? If one believes in the after life, then his present realm of mind
5
determines his future life.‖
―But nearly all the students take the word list (Chinese logic in word interpretation) or grammatical structure (structural logic)
highly important.‖
―If the average rate of passing the exam is 10 percent, you have the same probability.‖
―I would not. But logic is really important.‖
―Logic merely acts as a language of sensation, not at all the essence of wisdom, and could be the dead representation of our live
sensation. People need it to express their sensations, to communicate. It is in fact a scientific language, not wisdom. Great
mathematicians are often philosophers, but however, mathematicians often find faults in their basic axiom systems, and many
mathematicians assert that it is sensation that conducts logic deduction.‖

So my conclusion is: Logic always has limitation but sensation does not; Logic is relative and sensation is not confined as long as
one is resolved to cultivate; Logic is relatively dead but sensation is alive. But to cultivate sensation one needs to escape all the
distraction (for the sticking manner) from logics, knowledge, even the concept of sensation, returning to the infant nature – seemingly
ignorant of everything, but however, great wisdom often lies in the fool: ―Where ignorance is bless, it is folly to be wise.‖

Now that logic can never be complete, one can infer that conception itself yields incompleteness as long as it employs logical
means, i.e., conception yields anti-conception. Let‘s now discuss:

5. Conception and De-conception:

In education, especially in English as a second language for Chinese, when students meet a new concept or word, phrase, they are
normally eager to immediately get directly to its interpretations (in Chinese, or in mathematics and science, from existing concepts),
however, since each school or thought is limited to a specific background or referential frame, and it is usually hardly possible for one
to turn to such multi-points of focus. Then, I am considering ―defocusing‖ to maintain refocusing: forget all the distractions and get to
the right route.
Like things in the world, science and technology also exist in alternation of fashions, e.g., quantum world can be completely
different from classical physics. This makes people meditate: how can a well educated scholar change his point of view? Unless their
minds turned to the infancy - unknown.
In English learning for Chinese, those always interpreting it in Chinese never catch the essence of English, for they would always
understand English in Chinese logic, background, or points of view, never switch to the heterogeneous referential point of view. So
one has to abandon his native language to command a foreign language. This is another case of the infancy effect – as we know infant
language aptitude lies in its ignorance of thinking, reasoning, or idea, logic – no knowledge, no rules.
Thus arises the challenge to the change of mind: to learn but never to assume known – the way of humility:
Being the entrance of the world,
You embrace harmony
And become as a newborn
Chapter 28 of Daodejing [8]
See also Chapter 4 of Liaofan‘s Four Lessons - The Fourth Lesson: Benefits of the Virtue of Humility [10].
Like things in the world, whenever there is birth, there is also death from this distinction:
When beauty is abstracted
Then ugliness has been implied;
When good is abstracted
Then evil has been implied.

So alive and dead are abstracted from nature,

Difficult and easy abstracted from progress,
Long and short abstracted from contrast,
High and low abstracted from depth,
Song and speech abstracted from melody,
After and before abstracted from sequence.
Chapter 2 of Daodejing [8]
Same to a concept, i.e., concept is always accompanied by anti-concept as in the taiji figure, whenever there exists such a
distinction. Then one should argue about the role of concept: both positive and negative roles integrated in one entity. Is there a proper
way of conception that can effectively inhibit the negative role, or the death of concept? Sure, just to keep it indistinct, as in its
original, unspecified, indeterminate or infant state – keep it primitive, immature, as if unborn, even we need it for communication to
different spheres of mind. So it is wise to vacate our mind (free our mind) to maintain ―creativity‖ (an improper metaphor for a
6
wisdom seed) alive (on going), as in an infant way. In fact, creativity lies in the ignorance of creativity as against the confined or
constrained (e.g., to a spot oriented world - A science fiction film has compare our globe to a tiny spot in the universe) way. Otherwise,
a philosophy can be believed true when it serves our motif, and false when it doesn‘t. In this manner, the world would be led into a
self-centered society as our self-centered ideology expands, bringing all the people into the real nihility – no gleam of truth can be
seen anymore in this blind world. What time, however, will human being sacrifice our own motif to adapt to the motif of the universe?
To command science, one has to abandon (ignore) science. To acquire genius, one has to abandon (ignore) genius. To acquire
himself, one has to forget or loose himself. But important: abandoning everything only to get to the right education, the route of
absolute truth – we are not defocusing actually but changing our focus to the universal mind.

6. Truth and Absolute Truth

The discussion originates from Dr. Florentin Smarandache in our common book Neutrosophic Dialogues: ―What I argue about is
that we are not sure if we know all possible worlds.‖ I have to argue that is the ―truth‖ true or the truth points to a true world of
understanding, namely the source of truth? Truth in the former sense is capricious (wuchang in Chinese, or anitya, anityatā in
Sanskrit). This makes people feel that there might be no absolute truth. What I understand the absolute truth is the universal mind, the
harmony with the universe. All branches of truth must serve this motif, or in vain if deviate from it. This might be the reason why
people feel in vain to seek truth, because it is assumed to serve private purpose rather than the harmony of human being or that of the
universe.
It may not be the fault of the truth, but the reflection from a self-centered mental world. This might be the reason why we never
get to a universal truth, since we never correct our sins (see Chapter 2 of Liaofan‘s Four Lessons – The Second Lesson: Ways to
Reform [10]).
A pointer to the truth is different from the truth. Any form of symbols serves only as such pointers. For example, when one draws
an elephant on the blackboard, it is no more than a figure. When one points to the moon, should we regard his finger as the moon? So
we say, truth is also false, since we adhere to such symbols, blind still.
The absolute truth, as the harmony with the universe, would appear as the absolutely natural behavior than a school of philosophy
– when one is completely melt into the universe, there would be no distinction in his mind between himself and the nature, and every
intention reveals the kindness of the nature, nothing evil at all. So he would not distinguish anything unnatural – never stand in the
illuded perspective. Of course he may never be aware that there is a philosophy or truth in his mind.
Does it then mean there is nothing to follow, as there is nothing we can hold in hand? No, since every good education is teaching
us the correct way rather than the correct symbols – to correct our mistakes (see Chapter 1 of Liaofan‘s Four Lessons – The Third
Lesson: Ways to Cultivate Goodness [10]).
Does it mean there is no truth? If to the god (I mean a being who is identical to the truth), he would answer no – no philosophy
needed, for he understands everything by intuition, or, the over-truth is no more than false, sine the manner would sentence a live truth
to death (by dead truth I mean the fixed mind inflexible to literal or other forms of changes). But to our ordinary man with countless
mistakes, truth exists in the implication of our faults: misbehaviors or misunderstandings - misbehavior or misunderstanding
definitely leads to unlucky effect or even misfortune, so truth comes (see Chapter 1 of Liaofan‘s Four Lessons – The First Lesson:
Learning to Create Destiny [10]).
Truth has no absolute language to represent, I am afraid. It is represented, according to the language of us (how can one fix the
live truth into some dead symbols reflected differently by different realms of mind). It is neither proper for us (in our blind world) to
measure – is it possible to measure a more general teaching (scientifically, the ―infinite dimensional‖ manner) with any clumsy, unapt
measurement (e.g., infinite dimensional manner)? In his measuring, he is accumulating doubts to his genuine consciousness (he is
unconsciously reflecting the symbols with his illuded consciousness). So a good way would be more efficiently shown through
conduct, behavior, etc., to correct our mistakes and misleading opinions (see Chapter 2 of Liaofan‘s Four Lessons – The Second
Lesson: Ways to Reform [10]).
Is there the absolute truth in science? Personally, if it serves the well being of people, there is. But if serves the greediness, there
also is – to teach us to abandon science, since, as the symbol of the nature, Dao in my belief is of the nature of humility, sacrificing
itself to nonentity and thus spreading all over the universe - as large (or in scientific term, as many dimensions) as the infinity.
Therefore, to reach the universal perspective of the absolute truth, one has to sacrifice any ideology of habitual referential model.
Refer to Chapter 4 of Liaofan‘s Four Lessons - The Fourth Lesson: Benefits of the Virtue of Humility [10] for more.

So here I conclude that: The absolute truth is only seen by heart when one abandons all the possible knowledge, philosophies
belonging to the different possible worlds that bewilder him. This should be a necessary means for one to get rid of all the distractions
from these realms, and cultivate himself in practice to the true light of unification.
Aware of the relativity of the forms of the absolute truth, one may argue about the similarity between absolute truth and nihility.
Definitely no. In the Chinese room experiment [9], the Englishman will manipulate symbols in Chinese, and he will give a correct
answer in Chinese, but is not conscious of what he did. Nihility implies a dead consciousness. However, not only is a genuine
7
consciousness alive, it also reflects the genuine truth.
Just as Lu You (of Song dynasty) wrote (my personal interpretation, as I failed to download an English piece):
The road seems ending in the hills and streams, I doubt,
But I see the dense willow trees and bright flowers of another village.
Don‘t worry about yourself, only by forgetting yourself can you follow the light, or you never understand the truth due to your endless
doubt.

7. Dual Trends of Neutrosophy

What creates the world?

1. The Tao that can be trodden is not the enduring and The Way that can be experienced is not true;
unchanging Tao. The name that can be named is not the enduring The world that can be constructed is not true.
and unchanging name. The Way manifests all that happens and may happen;
2. (Conceived of as) having no name, it is the originator of The world represents all that exists and may exist.
heaven and earth; (conceived of as) having a name, it is the
mother of all things. To experience without intention is to sense the world;
3. Always without desire we must be found, If its deep To experience with intention is to anticipate the world.
mystery we would sound; But if desire always within us be, Its These two experiences are indistinguishable;
outer fringe is all that we shall see [4]. Their construction differs but their effect is the same.

Beyond the gate of experience flows the Way,

Which is ever greater and more subtle than the world [8].
Men normally care too much about the fragmental details of the universe to maintain the hidden integral. In fact, every mind is
gifted with the gene of the universal mind: the integral of our ultimate inner nature which is identical with that of the universe. This is
what I call yang in I-Ching (the originator) - it is formless, shameless, timeless ... the completely opposite world from our believed
consciousness. So I call it the prior natal aspect, or wuji in the Taiji figure, or possibly Dao in Daoism.
We illustrate this character of no-desire (actually it is no mental But if there is desire, we can break the unification (denoted by
move, through which to achieve the greatest desire) as wuji: wuji state) into taiji (moving mind):
 In this way, we see the integrity of When beauty is abstracted
the universe. Then ugliness has been implied;
 Or in Chinese saying, the unification When good is abstracted
of man and heaven. Then evil has been implied [8]

So it is that existence and non-existence

give birth the one to (the idea of) the
other …[4]
And with the desire growing: But still, there remain both propensities: the integral way and the
splitting way:
things are thus
split up,

loosing their
integrity:

It is crucial that we would rather create more symbols theoretical How can one then reach the truth? First, understand the universal
than follow a natural way. heart that lies in non self desire. Second, abandon our splitting
manner (mental creations). The undo principle (to undo our
mental change):

8
  If someone points to the moon, can we
reach the moon by holding fast his fingers? the
 If someone points to the truth, can we splitting way
reach the truth by holding fast his theories?
 Because in this way we are merely returns to
holding fast such pointers that point to an infant way
reality, not reaching anything of reality. What
we have reached are merely such road signs.
Then does wuji imply anything nihility or absolute voidness, absolute empty? Definitely no. Let‘s see:
How much can your mind contain?
for a full cup: for an empty cup: For the no cup:

No more, because it is fully occupied. One cup. It can contain the universe, because it is
not confined to any form, shape or
boundary.

As illustrated in Chapter 28 of Daodejing [8]:

 Using the male (having no name, it is the originator, or father; having a name, it is the mother, so we cannot partial to either of them
in case of breaking the yin-yang unification - my personal annotation, as follows), being female,
 Being the entrance of the world (wuji),
 You embrace harmony (Dao)
 And become as a newborn (returning to the originality, the genuine nature).
So the only way is to abandon all our usual way pertaining to our current misleading world, as the preliminary step toward the true
world. Since truth and false in conventional sense are out of the splitting way: (conventional) logic way, so we should also abandon
such logic way to reach the completely natural way, returning to our natural integrity.

How would we then regard neutrosophy?

As either a new concept of more complete truth or a novel class of logic, it follows the birth, growth, prosperity, wither, death
cycle as in every science. Does one prefer a pointer or the ultimate true world?
If neutrosophy pertains to an instant state of art, no need to adhere to it, due to the constant update.
If to the soul of science, it is no logger external any more. So the way also lies in our inner cultivation.
But as the western understanding of the Chinese Middle Way (Doctrine of Mean), it needs to be further developed, for “When
mind is either being or non-being, it falls into the trap of affirmation. When mind is neither being nor non-being, it falls into the trap
of negation.‖ Either affirmation, or negation, then, is a trap from which one must free oneself in order to reach suunyataa (the ultimate
reality).‖ [2]
Doctrine of Mean may refer to our mind move: neither left (affirmation, as being) nor right (negation, as non being). So it may
mean to abandon our mind move (wishful desire) rather than to blend or merge our mind moves (wishful desires). The distinction
between current neutrosophic logic and Chinese Middle Way may be:

No mental move; Combining being and non-being in the Or mentally creating some new being as
Free of ideas that implies every idea; way of I-Ching (Book of Changes); truth to pursue, in a heresy way.
Dao that implies everything.
One may argue that I stand only on the religious background. As a matter of fact, if one finds such scientific way fundamentally
9
critical and the religious way more general, he would then reversely regard religious way scientific and so called ―scientific way‖
religious.

8. Determinacy and Indeterminacy

Does the genuine mind reflect the determinacy? Exactly, it reflects the truth, and in such a world there is no kidding, no confusion,
no upside-down, no wishful thought, no illusion, even no sickness, no death, no unsatisfaction, no evil, and no unintelligent.
Is it too fantastic? Just because a universal mind adds nothing personal or private to his mind, he doesn‘t ―reason‖ in logic, but
with intuition – nothing minded (although with the greatest will), and therefore being the universal mind. As discussed previously,
whenever there exists a more or less private mind, there is a private way or partial way, and anything against this private will or
private way should certainty regarded as indeterminate, hence the notion ―we live in relativism, approximation, continuously
changing worlds‖- we measure everything in a partial, private, more or less self-oriented, even illuding referential manner. We are
blind to the cause-effect ourselves, as if we drive a plane without any knowledge of the landscape, navigation, even our current
position, our destination – we are using the absolutely wrong measurement to indicate longitude, latitude … but we are unaware of.
Is that the reason why we have indeterminacy in neutrosophy? Yes. It should be a gateway to a more realistic specification of the
contradiction between subjectivity and objectivity. Because we know our limitations, we‘d better behave in humility, as someone said,
we are sin at birth.
Does humility mean anything in science? People normally over-emphasize the pro science so as to neglect the con. Not only has
neutrosophy summarized both, it also implies the humility in science – the indeterminacy, indicating both the incomplete and the
illusionary aspects of scientific manner.
Does neutrosophy implies anything religious? Certainly. ―When mind is either being or non-being, it falls into the trap of
affirmation. When mind is neither being nor non-being, it falls into the trap of negation.‖ Either affirmation, or negation, then, is a
trap from which one must free oneself in order to reach suunyataa (the ultimate reality) [2].
The pro aspect: Neutrosophy implies that both affirmation and negation are inadequate to illustrate the objectivity, so adds the
indeterminacy serving as the neutrality in between – neither affirmation nor negation, as guidance to the reality.
The con aspect: Neutrosophy fails to reach a depth realization of neutrality, thus conveying a different meaning from The Doctrine
of Means of Confucianism. Because, from Daodejing (my personal understanding), affirmation and negation are counterparts: They
yield each other - One affirms something while negates something (even the same thing) simultaneously. So one would fail to reach
the ―Middle Way‖ without compromising both affirmation and negation, i.e., ignoring the measurement.
As the conclusion: Neutrosophy should be in integral with pro, con and neither, with the ―neither‖ implying the ignorance of both.
Thus in this way, Neutrosophy implies the ignorance of neutrosophy. Or integrated in one word: humility. However, as one can point
to the moon but fail to reach, one needs to follow an education called ―religion‖ in practice to realize (acquire) the virtue of humility.

9. Final Remarks

As implied in neutrosophy, whenever there is a perspective point, there is self, reflected in the private referential manner, and thus
the incompleteness, and more than partiality: illusions from this self-centered view. A truth is so called absolute, because it is based on
no selfness, absolutely no, and in such a world people do see the truth instead of illusions. In fact, ―self‖ reflects rather illusions than
objectivity – a blind man see himself (in conventional sense) as self, but a wise man would see himself differently, e.g., as something
external to him, a tool he employs. Therefore, a preliminary step toward the universal understanding is to abandon the self oriented
desire, otherwise no gleam of truth can be seen.
Truth is not a kind of judgment or measurement that we can impose T,I,F values with our contaminated eyes, but the light with
which we see our blindness and ignorance.
Truth suggests more a correct way of life than a useless set of arcane symbols, therefore it is not represented as sciences, but the
Way, the Dao or the wisdom, imbedded in (intrinsic to) every spirit and is sure to be seen as long as one can abandon his private
measurements.
A fatal barrier toward our genuine understanding is the modern contamination: the modern culture, with which Chinese are
diligently following the dust. To open his eyes, one needs to keep away (even in seclusion) from his previous education: culture,
public media, network and even the polluted world, for a tiny pill of poison can spoil a pool of pure water men daily drink. The
danger is far less pernicious from material food than spiritual food.
A polluted mind would never be aware of the current danger. A lady from countryside once blamed for the contamination of water
in Xi‘an (in which we are living) which we regarded pure. A human flesh-eater normally enjoin the taste of the dishes, while a
university yang lady who just became a Buddhist (following the teaching), nauseated at the flesh she used to have at the student‘s
canteen. My wife in pregnancy also nauseated at the flesh she used to like and then changed her manner forever. Same to a
contaminated mind – one could suddenly be aware of something valuable in a specific environment, like Li Na (surname and given
name in Chinese), a famous singer who lately became a Buddhist nun in America.
10
 There is the birth, growth, prosperity, wither and death of logic, but no birth and death of truth. It is the source, a universe,
permanently alive. To discover the underlying truth in neutrosophy, one needs to abandon any logic adherent to it and see directly the
source, through out its countless birth and death cycles.
A pattern is true only when completed, implemented, testified and proved in practice, not in superstitious manner. This is the
significant difference between truth and logic.
Absolute truth is independent of our beliefs and measurements – it objectively exists through out the universe and is universally
true in every world, although represented in varying forms to different mental spheres and different phases of individuals. But, it is
also seen as relative in its capricious representations – It is not the fact that the truth varies, but our minds swing, and therefore see the
treatment in dynamic styles. See a poem by a famous Buddhist poet Su Shi in Song Dynasty
A great mountain by vertical and horizontal view,
Far, near, high, low, and each not same.
I can't see the true face of Lushan,
Because I am just in there.
and Daodejing Chp.7:
―Heaven is long-enduring and earth continues long. The reason why heaven and earth are able to endure and continue thus long is
because they do not live of, or for, themselves. This is how they are able to continue and endure.
Therefore the sage puts his own person last, and yet it is found in the foremost place; he treats his person as if it were foreign to
him, and yet that person is preserved. Is it not because he has no personal and private ends, that therefore such ends are realised?‖[4]

―Nature is complete because it does not serve itself.

The sage places himself after and finds himself before, ignores his desire and finds himself content.‖[8]

So the universal truth lies in the abandon of self-desires (As a beginner, I am unqualified to speak anything of Buddhism. For
those who have interest, please find sources in http://www.drba.org/CTTB/cttb_e.htm, the City of Ten Thousand Buddhas (CTTB,
USA) for English, and another site http://www.larong.com/ (mirror: http://www.physics.utah.edu/~junyu/larong/index).html for
Chinese, and may also find faults in my assertions).

10. A Heuristic Dream

It was at the dawn of April 30, 2003, in the dream, I was asking a repairing booth to have my bicycle repaired … in the end when
it was all done, I suddenly found my bicycle disappeared. I looked around and wonder: ―I didn‘t leave a half step away, why?‖ I was
terribly uneasy until half awake and realized that my real bicycle is OK. In the mainland China the majority rely on bicycle that equals
to cars in the United States. It is in fact a basic means of living. Accordingly I immediately realized that it is a heuristic dream.
I remember a film about the Sixth Patriarch, Master Huineng, in which he was invited by the Empress Wu (Wu Zetian of Tang
dynasty, the only woman emperor in Chinese history) to the capital (now Xi‘an) to teach Buddhism, but he declined, thus made the
empress angry. Just in a while she became aware: ―No dharma (method) is dharma (method)‖ - dharma may be the most natural, not
something we create or seek external to our nature - my personal guess (actually one should never guess, but I am afraid readers
would distort the original sense), see Heart Sutra [1] (It has long been proved in history that such civilization really exists (e.g., see
http://www.larong.com/larong/fawang/bio.html). In Tang dynasty Master Xuan Zang started from present Xi‘an and went to India on
a pilgrimage for Buddhist scriptures (based on which comes the novel ―Record of a Journey to the West‖). In his long journey he
frequently faced death, but Heart Sutra saved him, see ―Datangxiyuji‖):
When Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara was practicing the profound Prajna Paramita, he illuminated the Five Skandhas and saw that
they are all empty, and he crossed beyond all suffering and difficulty.
Shariputra, form does not differ from emptiness; emptiness does not differ from form. Form itself is emptiness; emptiness itself
is form. So too are feeling, cognition, formation, and consciousness.
Shariputra, all Dharmas are empty of characteristics. They are not produced, not destroyed, not defiled, not pure; and they
neither increase nor diminish. Therefore, in emptiness there is no form, feeling, cognition, formation, or consciousness; no eyes,
ears, nose, tongue, body, or mind; no sights, sounds, smells, tastes, objects of touch, or Dharmas; no field of the eyes up to and
including no field of mind consciousness; and no ignorance or ending of ignorance, up to and including no old age and death or
ending of old age and death. There is no suffering, no accumulating, no extinction, and no Way, and no understanding and no
attaining.
Because nothing is attained, the Bodhisattva through reliance on Prajna Paramita is unimpeded in his mind. Because there is no
impediment, he is not afraid, and he leaves distorted dream-thinking far behind. Ultimately Nirvana! All Buddhas of the three
periods of time attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi through reliance on Prajna Paramita. Therefore know that Prajna Paramita is a
Great Spiritual Mantra, a Great Bright Mantra, a Supreme Mantra, an Unequalled Mantra. It can remove all suffering; it is genuine
and not false. That is why the Mantra of Prajna Paramita was spoken. Recite it like this:
11
 Gaté Gaté Paragaté Parasamgaté
Bodhi Svaha!
(It is strongly suggested that one never seek the meaning of the Chinese Classics when he reads, in the way of Chinese Classics
Recital Project of Prof. Wang mentioned in section 4, or what I call here the infant way - Whenever he does seek, he is seeking
distraction unwittingly. Plant rather than reap, or he will definitely distort the essence.)
As we know people nowadays are putting all their hearts and soles in the search of science – the supreme method believed by all,
just like the bicycle relied on in the dream. However science is merely a dream, a language of the current illuded world (as stated in
section 4, ants live in their own world and have their own characteristic of language, so do birds and humans), and can suddenly
disappear when we wake up. Even awake, one would find it terribly uneasy with this changed style of manner and would rather prefer
the old custom – it is still harder to adapt to a new life.
What is self? Something we daily rely on? Oh, just the bicycle in the dream – we are repairing it every minute and numerous
people are diligently finding and achieving it through out their lives, but we will eventually find no such self (in the conventional
sense) exists: it is rather a dream than the real self.
Our reflection of the world can be more or less an emersion, a projection, or a developed image of our mind move, including T,I,F
in neutrosophy, I hazily figure, although I am still in the maze. But, as implied in all the Buddhist scriptures, EVERYONE CAN
EXTRICATE HIMSELF OUT OF THE MAZE OF ILLUSION – countless people have already succeeded in their cultivation, like
Sakyamuni and all the Buddhas, Bodhisattvas around the universe, their number is as many as that of the sands in countless Ganges.
But preliminarily, stop our mental creativity and imagination, honestly and sincerely follow the greatest teachings. However, one may
argue whether it is necessary to discard old habits and ideologies, even modern culture. I feel that in this severely upside-down world,
one seldom see the alive Confucianism or Daoism (more distorted ones) and the society has almost lost its inner justice overwhelmed
by greediness etc. Without basic social regulations, or without strict commandments, neither civilization would have been built up,
nor would any dharma have been actually seen, from any greatest teaching (any greatest culture will definitely in this way deteriorate
into the devil‘s saying). So it is more suggested to popularize Confucianism in our current society (in which the most valuable thing is
being lost and the real civilization is dying, impacted by the western modernization), as a preliminary step toward further educations
(Confucianism and Daoism served exactly as the basis in Chinese history for the introduction of Mahayana. So it was an absolutely
wise deed to popularize these Classics as the basic education).

References:

[1] Buddhist Text Translation Society: The Heart of Prajna Paramita Sutra, 1997, http://www.drba.org/heart_sutra_e.htm
[2] Chung-yuan Chang: Ch'an Buddhism: Logical and Illogical, http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/ew27057.htm.
[3] Chin-Kung, Reestablishing Morality and Educating the Youngsters – An Interview, 2002,
http://www.amtb.org.sg/2/2_10/2_10_1/2_10_1.htm.
[4] James Legge: Tao Te Ching, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1996, http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/text/tao/tao.htm.
[5] Feng Liu: Name, Denominable and Undenominable, ——On Neither <A> Nor <Anti-A>, Proceedings of the First International
Conference on Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Logic, Set, and Probability, University of New Mexico, USA, 2002, pp.107-113,
http://www.gallup.unm.edu/~smarandache/FirstNeutConf.htm, http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/math/papers/0306/0306384.pdf.
[6] Feng Liu: Paradoxes Review——On Neither <A> Nor <Anti-A>, Smarandache Notions (book series, Vol. 13), edited by Jack
Allen, Feng Liu, Dragos Constantinescu, American Research Press 2002, pp.200-203
[7] Feng Liu, Florentin Smarandache: Logic: a Misleading Concept － A Contradiction Study toward Agent’s Logic Ontology,
Proceedings of the First International Conference on Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Logic, Set, and Probability, University of New
Mexico, USA, 2002, pp.88-100, http://www.gallup.unm.edu/~smarandache/NeutrosophicProceedings.pdf; Libertas Mathematica,
University of Texas at Arlington, 2002; Los Alamos National Laboratory archives (New Mexico,USA),
http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/math/papers/0211/0211465.pdf; Dialectics and the Dao, On Both, <A> and <Non-A> in Neutrosophy and
Chinese Philosophy (title changed), Seeking Wisdom journal, Gallup, NM, USA, No. 1, pp. 56-66, Spring 2003..
[8] Peter A. Merel: TaoDeChing - Lao Tze, GNL's Not Lao Version 2.07, 1995, http://www.chinapage.com/gnl.html.
[9] J. R. Searle: Minds, brains and programs, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1980, 3, pp.417-457.
[10] Liao-Fan Yuan (ancient): Liaofan’s Four Lessons, http://www.amtb.org.tw/e-bud/liaofan.HTM,
http://www.amtb-dba.org/English/Text/ChangingDestiny/index.html, http://www.amtb-dba.org/English/Text/LiaoFan/index.html.

12